About half of the Seahawk fanbase polled would extend Russell Wilson at any cost. The other half wants a more team cap friendly deal and some want to trade him for what I assume would be a kings ransom. What are your thoughts? Personally, and I love Russ, but trade him. I think in a system that pushes a strong running game with a stout defense, the QB has less pressure than a pass-oriented team with ok defense that is designed to win shootouts. In that scenario, Aaron Rodgers money is called for. But with the Seahawks, a accurate, and yeah I'll say it, "Game Manager" type of QB that makes decent but not top dollar money would be perfect for them.

Look, its not a question of Russ or Nathan Peterman. There are good QBs coming up that could do the job AND be on a cap friendly rookie contract. Think RW + LOB all over again. Russ's rookie contract allowed big spending else where. Come get one of those QBs that teams trade back into the late first round for and you got him for 5 years on the cheap!

Love him and he'll always be remembered as part of the greatest Seahawk teams (so far) but Russ has got to go.

Yes, pay him. Not because he's worth $35M a year but the cost to replace a QB that can play at his level is nearly impossible.

All the people that argue that spending this kind of money cripples your franchise... yes, there's a lot of logic to that. But the ability to find a generational talent like Russell in the next draft or in FA is illogical.

If you can find a $15-20M or rookie QB you have tons of money to throw around your veterans or Free Agent, but no player has such an impact on a team than the QB.

The Seahawks are not in a position where they are winning in-spite of Wilson, they are winning largley because of Wilson's efficiency. I don't understand the logic that Wilson (and the money he costs) is replaceable.

There's no defensive player that could eat up a portion of that money and make the Seahawks that much better than what Wilson already brings.

First we'd need to agree that Russ is a generational talent. If he is, I want to know what generation? RW is a great QB but "generational"? If you really believe that then Yes, you'd pay him. I don't. No one will remember this era of the NFL as the Russell Wilson Era. Not with the big 3 of Brady, Rogers and Brees in the league. It's because he's a great fit for this team and the way they use him.

The goal is Super Bowls. I don't believe part of getting there is securing a top 5 paid QB. We need to look at the ingredients to go to the Bowl in this era of football and salary cap. That is the Russell Wilson and Carson Wentz model of team building. Drafting QBs is a crap-shoot but that's why you hire the best GM and Scouting Department money can by. They increase your chances of not drafting a dud. Get a player like Mahomes and your golden. Hell, I think Pete Carroll could build a winner around Lamar Jackson. I mean, he's a running threat that would complicate the already formidable run game and would give us money to get great players at other positions.

Ultimately I believe the key to winning the Super Bowl isn't the highest paid Quarterback. It is the quality of the playerS (plural) on your team. In this era the money is better spent in multiple, smaller chunks to 2nd contract players than one lump sum to QB of a run first team.

I've seen what a Hasselbeck-less and Wilson-less Seahawks team looks like.

I also have seen what happens when you tie your boat to QBs like Stafford, Carr, Schuab, Dalton, Romo, Prescott, Goff, Smith, <Insert Browns QB>, Bortles, etc.

Paying a QB is not a total detriment to a team's superbowl chances. While Tom Brady is taking a less contract, he's still made it to 3 of the past 4 Superbowls.

Matt Ryan made it to a Superbowl. Manning made it to 3 Superbowls being a highly cap-restrictive position. For every Rookie Joe Flacco, Ben Roethelisberger, Russell Wilson or Collin Kaepernick, there are guys like Cam Newton, Eli Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees and Kurt Warners.

The biggest thing is investing in the right players; whether that's the QB, DE, OL or P. The NFL as a whole does not define what is best for the Seahawks given they are the only team to rush more than they pass, the only team to have 2,000+ yards rushing and how lost 5+ Pro-Bowlers from their defensive roster from last year.

I have yet to see how Wilson's current contract prevented them from retaining any of their best players. The best player they lost was due to betting on the wrong player and that was Percy Harvin over Golden Tate. There's no other former Seahawks who was released or lost in Free Agency that has gone on to have a better career.

Here's the thing, no franchise will willingly give up on their QB. The fact that Kirk Cousins can get $84M guaranteed is less about Kirk Cousins and more about how much the position is coveted. If anything, it proves that Washington was right for stringing him along for as long as they could. They are not that far off from where Minnesota is right now but they lost their QB so they are shot.

Russell's succcess is so hard to replicate and I feel that we (collective "we") too often look at the fantasy numbers to justify who is good/bad. Lamar Jackson is on a great tear right now... but Russell has been Russell for 7+ years now. There's no sign that he's holding this team back in any capacity and that is valuable in-of-itself.

The other issue is that there is not always money to spend on these great talents in Free Agency. The best bargains for Seattle have been guys that no one wanted (Arvil, Bennnett, Baldwin, Browner, McDaniels, McDougald, etc.) or were willing to give them top-dollar so they took a short-term deal to try it out.

@Lymon I was floored when I saw that she made over 2x the amount he did! I had no idea! Still, if that is the reason he didn't want the richest contract in NFL history then Ciara needs to get off her lazy tookus and sang some more songs!

Everything is relative with the cap. The cap goes up and so does the players salary demands. But I agree about Wilson. The key is "reasonable amount". I'm saying that 35 million a year is not reasonable for what the position is asked to do in this system. Russ has perhaps played so well that he's played himself right out of the Seahawks system. If the system relies on Running over 50% of the time and a top 5 defense then is it really wise to spend what would be the NFL's richest contract with the most money ever guaranteed? I'm saying no. I don't really know why anyone would say yes?

Yes, we are winning because of Wilson right now, not just with him. But we have to.. hes on his second contract. Hes eating a huge percentage of the cap. And although the cap goes up every year, the percentage of the cap that is taken up by the quarterback has been steadily increasing.

You dont need a generational quarterback to win the Super Bowl. There isnt one answer to the Super Bowl puzzle. Its, in my opinion, very lazy of teams to keep going with the Peyton Manning Model.. "once you have your QB pay him anything because thats all that matters!"

Last Super Bowl.. it was Brady vs Foles. Brady takes less because his business gets benefits from the Patriots. Foles was a cheap back up, Wentz was on his rookie contract.

The year before, Matt Ryan was the high priced QB and lost. The cheaper quarterback won (Brady again).

The year before? It was Manning and Newton. This is where we reinforced the Manning method..

The year before that.. Wilson on his rookie contract, Brady on his discount contract.

They year before that.. Wilson vs Manning. Two completely different models of getting there.

Before that , Flacco and Kaep.. 2 qbs on their rookie contracts.

We dont see Stafford, Rodgers, Rivers or any number of other "franchise QBs" whose teams use up a huge amount of cap space on their qb. You CAN win that way..but its really hard.. if 20 teams build that way and you want to compete with them..you have to have a better QB or potentially better WRS. Its hard to get a competitive advantage unless you truly have a super elite QB like Manning. Mere Franchise QBs dont seem to cut it when paid like the market says they should be, and then look at the Seahawks -- the more they pay Wilson the worse theyve done in the playoffs.

I heard it mentioned if you build this way its easier because its easier to get one player right -- The QB. But I dont buy that.. to be competitive with a 30 million dollar QB taking up 17% of your cap you have to hit on all your draft picks so you have cheap , competent players everywhere.

It comes down to banking on the right player (regardless of position); and of any player to spend money on it should always be the QB based on the fact they are the hardest to secure and hardest replace.

Without a replacement or draft position I feel that it's foolish to entertain the idea of replacing or trading Wilson away. Wilson is not a Stafford, Ryan, Carr or any other sub-tier QB who was recently extended.

But you DO recognize we got to the Super Bowl on his rookie contract, twice..and since then as his salary goes up weve been less and less successful, right? Potentially this year breaks that trend..though not yet..

No. I'm pretty sure that the Seahawks paid Wilson $99M his first contract.

Who are these players that the Seahawks are magically missing out on by giving Wilson his first extension? If anything trading for players like Harvin and Graham have done more to hurt the Seahawks than extending their QB.

No. I'm pretty sure that the Seahawks paid Wilson $99M his first contract.

Who are these players that the Seahawks are magically missing out on by giving Wilson his first extension? If anything trading for players like Harvin and Graham have done more to hurt the Seahawks than extending their QB.

This is pretty difficult to answer with specific names. I will say that all that extra money would have been spent. Maybe even spent on the Offensive Line that was neglected for so long because there wasn't money to pay them. That's the kind of thing that happens when a QB is signed to massive contracts. There becomes less money to spend on players from every position group.

What I'm saying is, IN THIS ERA, I believe that a team will have a better chance at winning it all by drafting a Rookie QB, and using all the extra money to solidify the rest of the teams position groups. Which is what the Seahawks did that won them SB48. It is especially important to do this now. With the bounty from a Wilson trade the Seahawks could be rebuilt in an offseason and back to the SB in 3 years. So in other words, attack this roster like PC and JS did when they first got here. Worked the first time!